Re: Asperger's...Ted Kozinski is likely one... » dj

> > Interesting thought. I think with Kaczynski, though, there developed a co-existing delusional >disorder (paranoia). > > Kaczynski's reasoning, from his published treatise on society and technology, was described as credible (though not the violence he took on himself to commit), logical and a genuine reason for concern by the chief scientist from Sun Microsystems in a widely reported cover story in Wired magazine, back in April or so (can't figure out which pile of mags. I've go it in).> > As well, in a recent (May or June I believe) cover story in the Atlantic a fellow Harvard student from Kaczynski's era details how Kaczynski was very young and driven when he arrived at Harvard (from what would now be termed as a dysfunctional family), how the values he promotes are in line with the values he learned in his studies at Harvard and in some cruel psych. experiments he was coerced into participating in...> > There is a reason for everything, ever action and every re-action and if we look deeply and carefully enough at causes and effects we can see them, without reverting to simplistic diagnostics, third hand or so...> > As Einstein noted: "Make things as simple as possible and no simpler." If we all followed that dictum our society would be much saner and healthier. Instead we have a society addicted to mass trivia and idiotic, pseudo-events like: Survivor which demontrates clearly the thesis behind the brilliant book: "Amusing Ourselves to Death: by Neil Postman.

djInteresting stuff you cite. And you're right, of course, people are always more than any diagnosic category we would like to put on them. I did read, however, that Paraniod Schizophrenia was the "official" diagnosis they gave Kaczynski. Diagnostic categories are only useful in describing a set of symptoms. To reiterate, they don't describe the complexity of a whole person. Certainly not someone as brilliant and complex as Ted Kaczynski.

Anyway, however logical any of his thoughts and reasons were, blowing up people is a little off the charts. Unless it were for some achievable goal, like in a war situation where it is part of an orchestrated strategy. NOT that I believe in blowing up people for any cause (although there are times....).

I agree, too, about Survivor. It's ,IMHO, boring to watch voyeuristic programs. I have enough of my own conflicts, thank you. I don't find anything particularly instructive or enlightening or thought provoking about any of it. It's more than trivia, it's like a version of Jerry Springer. And I hate those daytime shows! Setting up a conflict situation in the name of resolution, BS, it is voyeuristic showmanship. Just my opinion.